August 8, 2008

We've gone over 200 comments on the Edwards post, which doesn't make it impossible to comment, but only makes the comments hard to find. (Click on "post a comment," scroll to the bottom of the page, then click on "newer" — ridiculous, no?) So this is another Edwards post. Carry on here.

Our family has been through a lot. Some caused by nature, some caused by human weakness, and some – most recently – caused by the desire for sensationalism and profit without any regard for the human consequences. None of these has been easy. But we have stood with one another through them all. Although John believes he should stand alone and take the consequences of his action now, when the door closes behind him, he has his family waiting for him.

John made a terrible mistake in 2006. The fact that it is a mistake that many others have made before him did not make it any easier for me to hear when he told me what he had done. But he did tell me. And we began a long and painful process in 2006, a process oddly made somewhat easier with my diagnosis in March of 2007. This was our private matter, and I frankly wanted it to be private because as painful as it was I did not want to have to play it out on a public stage as well. Because of a recent string of hurtful and absurd lies in a tabloid publication, because of a picture falsely suggesting that John was spending time with a child it wrongly alleged he had fathered outside our marriage, our private matter could no longer be wholly private.

So he wasn't at the hotel with the child? Or he was there with the child that he didn't father? Blah. Did you watch him on "Nightline." I didn't. I never watch "Nightline."

WOODRUFF: I know this is a very difficult question, but were you in love with [Rielle Hunter]?

EDWARDS: [Answers in the present tense that he is "in love with one woman," his wife Elizabeth. Woodruff doesn't figure out that he should insist on an answer to the question that was asked in the past tense.]

WOODRUFF: Your wife, Elizabeth, is probably the most admired and beloved person in this country, she's had enormous sympathy because she's also gone through cancer, how could you have done this?

Probably the most admired and beloved person in this country.... Where did that come from? Woodruff is a ninny. "How could you have done this?" is a pretty silly question anyway. Why doesn't he just slap Edwards in the face and shout "you beast!"? Edwards gives a long answer that boils down to the fact that he was selfish and egomaniacal — and running for VP can do that to a man.

Woodruff asks about the picture of Edwards holding the baby, and Edwards goes on about how he can't say what that picture is. Woodruff has the wit to ask him, "But are you saying you don't remember holding that child of Miss Hunter?" Edwards, tellingly, goes back to the photograph:

EDWARDS: I'm saying you asked me about this photograph, I don't know anything about that photograph, I don't know who that baby is. I don't know if the picture has been altered, manufactured, if it's a picture of me taken some other time, holding another baby -- I have no idea. I was not at this meeting holding a child for my photograph to be taken I can tell you that.

Pay attention here. He does not say he didn't hold the child. He only says he didn't pose for a photograph and is refusing to authenticate the photograph. This has a real smokescreen feeling to it that to me this suggests that he did hold the baby.

Woodruff follows up:

WOODRUFF: You did say you did meet her at a hotel in California.

EDWARDS: She was there, Mr. McGovern was present, and that's where the meeting took place.

If you had read the Nightline transcript, Ms. Althouse, you would know he says the child was not present for the Bev Hills meeting. His purpose in that meeting was to convince Ms. Hunter not to go public with the story of the affair.

And we began a long and painful process in 2006, a process oddly made somewhat easier with my diagnosis in March of 2007. This was our private matter, and I frankly wanted it to be private because as painful as it was I did not want to have to play it out on a public stage as well.

So, you conspired with your husband to deceive supporters who placed their faith and money in his campaign? Elizabeth, I've lost all respect for you.

Lisa said..."If you had read the Nightline transcript, Ms. Althouse, you would know he says the child was not present for the Bev Hills meeting."

I would? I think you mean I would know he asserted that. The National Enquirer asserted that the child was there. Maybe the child was taken out of the room for the "meeting" part. Why should I believe anything he says when one of the things he's saying is that he lied?

What was Edwards thinking? Are these candidates so disconnected from reality that they think they will get away with this stuff?

Maybe we should start taking bets on Obama's chances to have an affair if he is elected. I mean what are the chances that a young liberal/non-religious conservative will bang one of his aides while in office. Lets see: we have Bill Clinton, JFK, hmm... So based on historical comparisons, the chances are 100%.

This isn't like Hillary Clinton ironically standing by her man, after a faint-hearted show of being hurt and having Chelsea walk between them to the Air Force chopper in that photo op. That whole scene was as scripted as this famous little "hugging" session -- not unlike this one.

The Clintons' whole marriage was and is a sham, but then, we all know that.

The Edwards presented a more united, more real partnership than the Clintons.

This is what makes this story sleazier, and far more disappointing to his supporters, in large part due to Elizabeth Edwards' reaction.

Senator Edwards was not like Clinton who couldn't moralise about extra-marital affairs, because of the sheer number of them. Edwards always emphasised his family, trotting them out for photo ops, and worse, condemning marital lapses in others' marriages.

On the other hand, I'm glad the story finally made MAINSTREAM headlines (it was the centrist ABC who did).

So far, it's been a tabloid and blogger story until now. It's impossible not to be laughed at when you cite the National Enquirer as your source.

Blogging is like living in a parallel journalistic world, where people online know stuff months, if not a whole year ahead of others, talk about it at length, but it has no credence because no major entity had the guts to talk about it.

I'm sorry for Mrs. Edwards that the end of her life has just been handed an added emotional burden, but it's not to the National Enquirer that she should be angry at.

Maybe we should start taking bets on Obama's chances to have an affair if he is elected.

I would be very shocked if Obama ever lapsed this way. I think most of us know a truly genuine marriage between two solid people, like GW & Laura Bush or Al & Tipper Gore have, and I think the Obamas are one of those couples.

I never got that vibe from the Edwards. She was an ambitious enabler, just like Hillary.

I've long believed the National Enquirer should not be lumped in with other tabloids. One thing the Enquirer has in common with other tabloids is that they are sleazy. The way they distinguish themselves from other tabloids is that most of what's in the Enquirer is actually true.

Based on my experience with the Enquirer being a sleazy but accurate tabloid, I believed their Edwards stories from the start, and I think that people who try and tell me something can't be trusted because it was broken by the Enquirer just haven't paid attention to the fact that the Enquirer usually gets their stories right.

I feel a bit weird when I buy an Enquirer at the supermarket. But at least - when I do - I'm buying the one tabloid that has accurate (though sleazy) stories!

I don't believe them when they claim Bush is back on the sauce (I read that claim here, and researched it, nada),

I'd have to see that story, but I could think of no better explanation for Bush's pretzel incident than that he was drunk. Not that I think there's be anything wrong with that. My take on Bush's heavy drinking days was that he went totally dry to please his wife but that he was never really an out of hand alcoholic. People wanna label anyone who likes to get a buzz in the evening as alcoholic nowadays. (Yes, I am speaking as someone who has been mislabeled an alcoholic by people who think I "drink too much" regardless of the fact that it hasn't had negative consequences on my responsibilities. I think people some people are just too puritanical nowadays.)

or that Elvis is alive and Princess Di just had his love child.

I'm not a regular reader of the Enquirer, but I associate these sorts of stories with their competitor tabloids. Every issue of the Enquirer I have read has not had this sort of story and has instead had stories which, as far as I know, turned out to be accurate. I could be wrong, though, and I'll stand corrected if they actually do deal in this sort of thing.

Anyway, I think its disgusting how he could do this to his sick wife. I'm sure McCain would never cheat on his sick wife with another woman. Ever.

This is obviously bad for Obama. Everyone knows that Obama is a womanizer and is porking Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. But then again, we know he's a womanizer, because he's black. All black men are sexual animals who can't control themselves.

McCain on the other hand has only slept with one woman, been married once, and never had an affair.

Edwards was irrelevant long before this story broke. And it's entirely in keeping with my original impression of him as smarmy and vain. The story doesn't interest me in the slightest because he doesn't, and never has. It's not a fall because in my book he had nowhere to fall to.

But the politicians cheating on sick wives meme (which also includes Newt Gingrich, don't forget) is sordid and saddening. Are they just ordinary people whose peccadilloes get more exposure than the rest of ours, or are they worse?

You know that scene in "Men in Black" where Tommy Lee Jones explains that supermarket tabloids had the finest investigative reporting in the country? I'm starting to wonder if that was actually a joke.

For those disparaging the Enquirer, they get sued fairly frequently, but almost never lose. They are sensationalist and wildly speculate based on limited facts, but those facts are almost never wrong. The few times they've gotten in trouble -- at least since the Burnett suit in 1981 -- it has mostly been from publishing stories based on unreliable paid sources, not because they were lying or making stuff up themselves.

As for the Enquirer coverage of the current story, they seem to be playing a little fast and loose with the "love child" conclusion. But I would be very surprised if any of the actual facts they have reported are false.

Well Blake and vbspurs you're both morons. I'm not a leftist and I'm not angry.

I actually enjoy mocking America and watching it become a pathetic country. That's why I moved.

You have major economic problems (clueless as to how fast the rest of the world is passing you by) and an idiotic war, and all you pathetic Americans can do is talk about Paris Hilton and John Edward's love child.

I'd have to see that story, but I could think of no better explanation for Bush's pretzel incident than that he was drunk.

You know, Bush is the archetypical reformed rake-type: those men who were wild in their youths but had an amazing mid-30s personality reversal.

Before Bush was messy, loutish, and didn't care about form and protocol, to his mother's irritation.

Today, he is a neat freak, in control of his emotions, and a stickler for punctuality and respect (both given and received).

In short, he's done a 180 from the guy he used to be in his youth. He attributes the change to his wife putting her foot down about his drinking, and his faith.

But actually, he's very similar to JFK in that HE underwent an almost identical personality shift, save for his womanising and lack of converted religiosity.

Jack Kennedy, the kid who hated clothes and was a slob at boarding school, became the man who changed into crisp shirts and suits maniacally several times a day, and had his desk photographed so that the White House cleaners knew where to put everything back JUST RIGHT, once dusted.

Like all reformed rakes, they love nothing more than to shove their new controlled habits into other people's faces, because the way they were irritates them deeply inside.

I often think this is why older men are really irritated by young guys. They see how they used to be 20 years back, and they don't like it one bit.

I am totally, completely, absolutely all consumified by the ugliest jealousy you can imagine!

I am jealous with a capital J and that’s JEALOUS!!!

If only Mrs. Bissage would get struck down with life-threatening cancer then I could step out and get me some of that fine, high-class poon tang.

A big league mistress like Rielle Hunter will meet you in a fancy hotel for a quickie and she can put her ankles behind her head and she’ll let you pump her while she rubs your prostate like a she’s trying to get a genie out of a magic lamp!

She’ll push her jugs together and let you grease her up and stick it right in there! Hell, if you want to, she’ll let you finish up on her face and she’ll wear a smile!

But not so fast, cowboy! She can suck the chrome off a trailer hitch and she’ll blow you with ice cubes in her mouth and afterwards you can do her doggy style while she does military-style hand-clap pushups! Hold on, baby, because that’s some wild ride!

YEEEEE-HAAAAAAAH!!!!1!1!!

God, and to think it was only a year and a half ago I paid real money to have a lump removed from my wife’s breast.

So, you conspired with your husband to deceive supporters who placed their faith and money in his campaign? Elizabeth, I've lost all respect for you.

garage mahal: Yep, how dare they not come clean [unlike every other living politician in history] to the National Enquirer sooner!

No, moron. Elizabeth and John had a duty to their supporters, not the media. Their base had a right to know his electibility was handicapped by this affair, so they could consider investing their time and energy in someone else.

Elizabeth: This was our private matter, and I frankly wanted it to be private because as painful as it was I did not want to have to play it out on a public stage

Right. I'll try that line out next time my security clearance is up. "Mr FBI Agent, its a private matter, none of your business".

"If you had read the Nightline transcript, Ms. Althouse, you would know he says the child was not present for the Bev Hills meeting. His purpose in that meeting was to convince Ms. Hunter not to go public with the story of the affair."

Lisa, you seem to be taking what John Edwards says as an indication that it is truth.

I suggest to you that experience dictates that the opposite might be more appropriate- that when he says something, it makes more sense to presume the opposite is true.

All humans are subject to the thought that doing X will make them happier than not doing X, even though they know they shouldn't do it, and after they do it (or get caught) they find out that the cost was too high and their life is miserable.

So, on that account I can be sympathetic to Edwards.

But the real display of his character is that he'd cover it up and keep trying to fool the voting public.

There is a Mormon scripture that teaches that men are really going down hill, not when they sin, but when they undertake to cover their sins, or to gratify their pride, their vain ambition, or when they exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men (i.e. are controlling of others.)

Anyway, I hope Edwards can get back on track with his wife, so he doesn't have to live one day more at odds with her.

The body of your postings here suggests that the former part is a lie. You are pretty far to the left.

The second part is also disproven by the body of your postings here, but probably best exemplified by a comment on this very thread-- "It'll be enjoyable to watch the shithole of a country known as America sink even further into the ditch."

If you aren't angry, then you have about the worst communication skills known to mankind.

"People wanna label anyone who likes to get a buzz in the evening as alcoholic nowadays. (Yes, I am speaking as someone who has been mislabeled an alcoholic by people who think I "drink too much" regardless of the fact that it hasn't had negative consequences on my responsibilities. I think people some people are just too puritanical nowadays.)"

LoafingOaf has it exactly right. This is all of a piece with the nanny statism where the liberal elitists don’t want you to smoke or drink or eat donuts fried in Tran’s fat. They are the direct descendants of Carrie Nation and those other fucking stupid Protestant assholes who wanted to control everyone. Now the cliché is that conservatives want to control people’s behavior. Bullshit. Conservatives like nothing better than smoking cigars and swilling cognac as we oppress the working man and live fat off the sweat of his brow. It's the fucking tofu eating, prius driving, carbon offset buying, Che t-shirt wearing, Kos posting, social worker cocksuckers that want to take away our cigars, booze and donuts. It is our duty to stand united against this pestilence. Go out have some fun tonight and show them that they can't kill our buzz.

I will be right back. I have to go to Dunkin Donuts and the liquor store.

I did a shot of jager every time Edwards answered one of Woodruff's questions with "Can I explain it to you?" Or, "Well, first let me explain something."

And did he apologize to his supporters at any point? (I got drunk and passed out.) I feel he owes me an apology for being a TOTAL DOUCHE and lying and leading me to believe that he wasn't a prick. I want an apology.

Hello, my name is Hillary Clinton. I am sitting here with my friends Silda Sptizer and Elizabeth Edwards, the most admired woman in America, next to me, of course.. Since my political career is over, I have decided to channel my thirty years of service into a new and exciting challenge. Today I am announcing the formation of a new organization for the empowerment of women and families. The American family is the bedrock of our civilization and the American woman, the wife, is the bedrock of our society. Sometimes we face challenges that are hard to overcome. To help face these challenges, I have asked Elizabeth and Silda to join be in the formation of the Stand By Your Man Organization. This organization’s sole purpose is to empower women to stand by their husbands and keep their families together, no matter the challenges facing them. Please look for our ads in all the major media and contribute.

"And did he apologize to his supporters at any point? (I got drunk and passed out.) I feel he owes me an apology for being a TOTAL DOUCHE and lying and leading me to believe that he wasn't a prick. I want an apology."

.,Edwards explains it all: "All my life I have been a nookie magnet--even in college before I had the big bucks. With looks like these how could I be otherwise. See this hair. Even when I don't have time to brush it one hundred times, it still stays lustrous and soft. That forelock that falls just so across my forehead? I asked Gerard to cut it just so in order to emphasize my sincerity. OK, it is Gerard's artistry, but it was my idea. I have taken to pushing it back from my forehead with my left as opposed to right hand. Did you notice how much more thoughtful this make me look......Do you know any other fiftyish lawyers who look this good in a pair of tight jeans? Well, that's the other shoe to fall. When it comes out that I have had silicon implants in my butt, the tabloids will go wild. But really, just as much as an actor, a tort lawyer's body is his instrument. It is important to always look your best.....That's where I feel Elizabeth let the home team down. I don't mind her being overweight and rather plain looking in relation to me. In fact, that's why I married her. Nothing is so damaging for a man of gravitas as having the crowd pay more attention to his wife than to him. I pity that Kucinich character....No, you only have to look at her to see that I'm a man of substance who pays more attention to brains and character than good looks. The Hillary defense it's called.....But then instead of being plain and smart and in the background, she turns into Camille. At all the press events, she takes center stage...Can anyone blame me for turning elsewhere to seek attention?

Did you guys check out the LAT Blog on the interview? Apart from the tortured writing...it captured Woodruff's emotionally-charged questioning:

Of the two, Woodruff was so obviously more upset by the situation that it became, at times, just plain weird. "Were you in love with her?" he asked, his voice shaking, and I thought the man would burst into tears. Not Edwards, but Woodruff.

Who among us is shocked, truly shocked, to have it confirmed once and for all that Edwards is a plastic and phony POS? Or even needed this story for that? Me, I personally had it fully confirmed in February of last year when I saw the original five minute video of him and his hair.

What came as a surprise to me was the role of Elizabeth. She's complicit here. But, then, cancer or not, the truth is she's always been fully participatory as a partisan hack.

"Who among us is shocked, truly shocked, to have it confirmed once and for all that Edwards is a plastic and phony POS? Or even needed this story for that? Me, I personally had it fully confirmed in February of last year when I saw the original five minute video of him and his hair. "

Conservatives like nothing better than smoking cigars and swilling cognac as we oppress the working man and live fat off the sweat of his brow. It's the fucking tofu eating, prius driving, carbon offset buying, Che t-shirt wearing, Kos posting, social worker cocksuckers that want to take away our cigars, booze and donuts. It is our duty to stand united against this pestilence. Go out have some fun tonight and show them that they can't kill our buzz.

I take it you haven't spent much time around some seriously born-again Christians, particularly of the Southern Baptist variety, eh, Trooper York? I'll agree with you that there are some major buzzkill people on the left, but there's no shortage of them on the right, also, and from what I've seen (being someone who has smoked, drank, and eaten a lot of beef and pastries at various liberal events, as well as more than a few conservative ones - I get around), the lefty buzzkill types don't have much sway outside their small but intensely dedicated circles. They certainly don't get invited to the fun liberal parties.

Oh, and one more thing. Fuck John Edwards. He could have sunk the whole Democratic Party if he got the Presidential or VP nod with this thing hanging over him. He should have just stayed on the sidelines, made money and screwed whoever he wanted without any of us caring or it affecting anyone outside his family. And for that matter, I'm not very happy with Elizabeth Edwards encouraging him to get back into the political fray if she knew this had happened, but I'm not going to criticize her much because of what she's gone through and because she wasn't the one who started this whole chain of events.

"The lefty buzz kill types don't have much sway outside their small but intensely dedicated circles. They certainly don't get invited to the fun liberal parties."

Well I live in New York City and we don't see many Southern Baptist types here since they have been outlawed except as tourists. But your basic commie liberal scumbags here in New York are the ones behind the no smoking, close down the bars at midnight and no Tran’s fat in your food movements. They are the goo-goo types on community boards and the local committees who work in a nefarious underground way to take the rights of the hard working degenerate population who want their shot and a beer while smoking a lucky strike and eating a mozzarella stick. I grant the point that there are plenty of those no good protestant blue noses out in the sticks, but here it is the lefties that want to kill our buzz. And they are all prime hypocrites of the John Edwards/Bill Clinton type who will carry a bible into church on Sunday to see if there are any more commandments to break. We need an honestly corrupt mayor like Jimmie Walker who only wanted to bang chorus girls, drink gin and take bribes and let the good times roll. Nanny Bloomberg should be impeached. As a drunken Papist sot I demand my rights to go to hell in the way I choose, not in the way that douche bag Bloomberg wants, watching tennis and choking on a tofu burger. Commies.

Yeah? You should try living in the United Socialist Soviet Republic of Chicago in good old Crook County Illinois. We have a Tsarist dictator for a mayor and a rubber stamp politburo for a city council. If you look up crooks, thieves, or despots, Chicago politician is the first definition. Everything is slowly being forbidden here. Everything is being taxed, fined, regulated- appropriate fees demanded of course, or confiscated. Small business is the enemy and corporate is in. Da Mayor, Richard Cranium, is now in Bejing. He is taking lessons from his mentors, the Chinese, on how to control citizens and deny them more rights, human or otherwise.

Trooper York said... It's the fucking tofu eating, prius driving, carbon offset buying, Che t-shirt wearing, Kos posting, social worker cocksuckers that want to take away our cigars, booze and donuts. It is our duty to stand united against this pestilence. Go out have some fun tonight and show them that they can't kill our buzz.

I’m with you Troop. I’m on the way out now!!! Of course, I have skulk and sneak around. Fun has been outlawed in this Democratic Socialist paradise Chicago. But, I know where to go. There are still a few places left where the smoking ban is laughed at, the beer is cold, the booze flows free, and the food is great- everything that is SUPPOSEDLY bad for you. The only music allowed is C&W and Rock and Roll. Every now and then there is even a major sporting event; a good, old fashioned, knock down, drag out bar fight. It is the ultimate dive.

Ole Uncle festus is going to give a speech at the Democratic convention. Here is a man with no shame who has done nothing but benefit from his serial infidelity. His so called wife, Senator Satnd by your man is now a haqs been.

I have an idea. He, Eliot Spitzar, John Edwards, and Jesse Jackson- all paragons of honesty, morality, and ethics, should give a joint appearance and speech. You know, kind of like the Three Tenors. They could be the Adulters Lying Quartet.

Both the NY Post and the NY Daily News did stories on Ms. Hunter. Evidently, according to them, she was a major party girl. In effect a sticky headed ho. I guess somethings never change as one matures.

It seems to me that there's both necessary and sufficient evidence for the description you offered with regard to Edwards. Also, he offered himself up for public consumption (yes, that would be one of my understatements).

Not so much so with regard to Hunter (in reference to sentence one of the previous graf). Also, not so much with regard to Hunter (in reference to sentence two of the previous graf).

Isn't it just possible that Edwards is a complete scuzz-bucket and totally culpable for this whole mess AND Hunter is a big 'ho?

Isn't it just possible that Edwards is a complete scuzz-bucket and totally culpable for this whole mess AND Hunter is not a "ho" (big or otherwise) though, at the same time, not without a certain culpability (and certainly not without a certain responsibility: it's just that it's not equivalent to his)?

C'mon, Palladian, you're better than this. And that.

You also know--or so I've always assumed--the difference between truly public figures and those who are not truly public figures.

"Because of a recent string of hurtful and absurd lies in a tabloid publication...."

What Elizabeth Edwards surely meant was "Because of a recent string of hurtful and absurd lies, published in a tabloid publication....".

It lacked an important comma. But punctuation isn't everyone's strong suit.

Bissage and Trooper are on fire.I hope this isn't a crowded theater; doubtful as I come into it the morning after.

And what gives? A bacchanal against against socialists, and I wasn't invited? But I hate nannystaters, too!Anyways.

Goodbye Johnny, ye of the Silky Hair; we hardly knew ye. Of course, neither did Elizabeth, apparently. Maybe if you do that lawyer thing again, where you channel the voices of the infant hurt by the evil transgressor (this time, you), maybe she'll forgive you.

"She speaks to you through me," the lawyer went on in his closing argument. "And I have to tell you right now — I didn't plan to talk about this — right now I feel her. I feel her presence. She's inside me, and she's talking to you."

Meade, the doctor was some kind of general surgeon/oncologist and she said the lump was benign but it should come out anyway. We didn’t ask any questions. We just showed up at the hospital on time.

It was done in a special breast surgery ward and I took Mrs. Bissage home after about four or five hours, IIRC. Cost about $8,000 but insurance paid for almost all of it.

(I just confirmed the bill with my lovely and talented wife who’s cutting flowers in the garden as we speak. I yelled out the window, “Hey, how much did that surgery cost?” Who says I’m not chock full of couthie goodness!)

Anyway, to tell you the truth, the hospital experience was actually kind of fun for me because I got to keep the patients and nurses and aides entertained in the post-op with a little comedy routine.